Was Vatican II Really Good for the Church
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 07:28:13 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Religion & Philosophy (Moderator: World politics is up Schmitt creek)
  Was Vatican II Really Good for the Church
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Was Vatican II Really Good for the Church  (Read 4609 times)
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 26, 2008, 07:00:02 PM »

Who would dare challenge that Vatican II has been anything but a huge success for the Catholic Church?  I mean, after all, more people would have to come once the priests stopped ranting away in an language that no one understands, doing things that have no meaning to the parishioners.  The new "Buddy Catholicism" surely lifted the Church above the errors of its medieval ways and made it more appealing to all... if only.

Let's look at some stats, shall we:

In 1965... the year Vatican II was enacted... there were 58,000 priests in the US (the figures are even worse in other parts of the former Catholic world, BTW).  Today, there are only 45,000, 16% of whom are immigrants.

In 1965, 1,575 priests were ordained in the US.  Today, only 450.

In 1965, there were 49,000 seminarians.  Today, there are only 4,700 across the country... an over 90% drop!

Weekly mass attendance was 75% in 1958.  Today its less than 25%.

In 1968, there were 338 annulments.  Today, over 50,000.

So... conventional wisdom rarely being wisdom at all, one can clearly see that something has gone terribly wrong.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2008, 07:01:12 PM »

BTW... all the "today" figures are from 2002, back when we had one of the most charismatic and popular popes in history, so you can't blame it on the current regime.
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2008, 07:38:10 PM »

Who would dare challenge that Vatican II has been anything but a huge success for the Catholic Church?  I mean, after all, more people would have to come once the priests stopped ranting away in an language that no one understands, doing things that have no meaning to the parishioners.  The new "Buddy Catholicism" surely lifted the Church above the errors of its medieval ways and made it more appealing to all... if only.

Let's look at some stats, shall we:

In 1965... the year Vatican II was enacted... there were 58,000 priests in the US (the figures are even worse in other parts of the former Catholic world, BTW).  Today, there are only 45,000, 16% of whom are immigrants.

In 1965, 1,575 priests were ordained in the US.  Today, only 450.

In 1965, there were 49,000 seminarians.  Today, there are only 4,700 across the country... an over 90% drop!

Weekly mass attendance was 75% in 1958.  Today its less than 25%.

In 1968, there were 338 annulments.  Today, over 50,000.

So... conventional wisdom rarely being wisdom at all, one can clearly see that something has gone terribly wrong.

With the exception of annulments (and how the church has become more liberal in granting them), i think most of thes stats have very little to do with VatII and more with the state of society or society's issues with the church, Vat II not withstanding.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: March 26, 2008, 07:42:12 PM »

These numbers would be twice as bad if it weren't for Vatican II.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2008, 08:45:30 PM »

I don't think Vatican II has as much to do with those declining numbers as other factors; of course, I feel that John XXIII was probably one of the three or four greatest Popes of all time, and I'm not Catholic, but that's what I think.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 26, 2008, 10:15:16 PM »

VII - virtually "protestanised" the Church.

Take it the other way, if the Church hadn't modernised, and the priests were still the mysterious "intermediary" - would the numbers be any better?

My father was an altar-boy and a good catholic boy, learning latin and all.... but stopped once VII happened... if he couldn't use the latin. What's the point?
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: March 26, 2008, 10:17:17 PM »

These numbers would be twice as bad if it weren't for Vatican II.

The numbers for many mainline Protestant denominations are far worse, and they liberalized more than the Church did.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 26, 2008, 10:27:38 PM »

I don't think Vatican II has as much to do with those declining numbers as other factors; of course, I feel that John XXIII was probably one of the three or four greatest Popes of all time, and I'm not Catholic, but that's what I think.

VII - virtually "protestanised" the Church.

Take it the other way, if the Church hadn't modernised, and the priests were still the mysterious "intermediary" - would the numbers be any better?

My father was an altar-boy and a good catholic boy, learning latin and all.... but stopped once VII happened... if he couldn't use the latin. What's the point?

I have no problem with a number of the edicts of Vatican II, however I would argue that Vatican II has clearly established a new culture in the Church that has been detrimental in many way.

First off, most of the changes that came from Vatican II, in terms of how the Church relates, officially to society and other Christian and non-Christian sects had been de facto the way things were for a while until that point.  So those "changes" weren't really all that necessary.

Secondly, (getting to Polnut's point) in terms of how the faith is actually practiced, I think it has had detrimental consequences.  Forget conducting the spiritual rites in Latin... certainly that was disposable.  However, the way things were conducted, the meaning that had been built up in the mass over every little thing that was done suddenly had no meaning.  And if those things are changeable and easily disposed of, then what prevents the wider things from being so easily subject to the winds of change.

People are demanding another council so that the Church can readjust to the world, even today, only 40 years after the last council.  People have come to assume that things can change whenever we want, for whatever reason, because society demands it to be that way.

I think these problems listed above, while not a direct result of Vatican II, do stem from the culture that emerged afterwards.
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 26, 2008, 10:35:24 PM »

I don't think Vatican II has as much to do with those declining numbers as other factors; of course, I feel that John XXIII was probably one of the three or four greatest Popes of all time, and I'm not Catholic, but that's what I think.

VII - virtually "protestanised" the Church.

Take it the other way, if the Church hadn't modernised, and the priests were still the mysterious "intermediary" - would the numbers be any better?

My father was an altar-boy and a good catholic boy, learning latin and all.... but stopped once VII happened... if he couldn't use the latin. What's the point?

I have no problem with a number of the edicts of Vatican II, however I would argue that Vatican II has clearly established a new culture in the Church that has been detrimental in many way.



I think you're too quickly disposing of the argument other factors, wholly separate from Vatican II are the cause of the church's statistical downfall.


Just a few examples which may or not actually be pertinent
1) The ban against cleric marriage-might be responsible for the lower levels of modern clergy
2) Changes in modern culture beginning right around the time of Vatican 2, the late 60s were an exciting era that might have changed American views of organized religion (let alone Catholicism) irrespective of what the church did to change itself
3) Modern lifestyle where often both parents work, or where the modern work week isn't really a 9 to 5, monday through friday week--if it ever was to begin with, preventing church attendance...

etc...I think you really need to consider factors like that before saying it was Vatican II
Logged
Tory
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,297


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: March 27, 2008, 12:29:43 AM »

I personally think Vatican II was bad for the church, and as for priesthood and attendance numbers I think all you need to do is look to the Eastern Orthodox, where change has been virtually nonexistant and yet they have no problems attracting men to the priesthood(or even to the monastic life, something the Catholics might as well give up on) and their attendance in the west has remained fairly steady; in the east obviously since the fall of communism there's been a rebirth of interest in and practice of the Orthodox faith despite no change in church doctrine, practice, or culture.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: March 27, 2008, 02:31:37 PM »

Worst idea ever.
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,833


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: March 27, 2008, 03:49:27 PM »

Vatican II did not go far enough.

But I agree with Soulty in that these stats can be explained away by societal change and attitudes towards the church. Without Vatican II, I would tend to believe some of the figures would have been significantly worse.
Logged
Flying Dog
Jtfdem
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,404
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: March 27, 2008, 03:52:44 PM »

Society=Epic Fail.

Logged
Sensei
senseiofj324
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,532
Panama


Political Matrix
E: -2.45, S: -5.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: March 27, 2008, 03:59:57 PM »

We also have to consider that there has been a wholesale decline in the amount of practicing people, and there has been an increase in non-adherents, at least in the US. The culture today seems to be far more conducive to secular people.
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: March 27, 2008, 04:40:34 PM »

Vatican II did not go far enough.

But I agree with Soulty in that these stats can be explained away by societal change and attitudes towards the church. Without Vatican II, I would tend to believe some of the figures would have been significantly worse.

AHEM
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,833


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: March 27, 2008, 04:43:40 PM »

Vatican II did not go far enough.

But I agree with Soulty in that these stats can be explained away by societal change and attitudes towards the church. Without Vatican II, I would tend to believe some of the figures would have been significantly worse.

AHEM

Sorry buddy Smiley I usually end up agreeing with one of you Smiley
Logged
Georg Ebner
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 408
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: September 20, 2018, 12:57:41 PM »

The only achievement of protestantism was to demonstrate, that there doesn't exist a bourgeois christianity.

The only achievement of Vaticanum II was to demonstrate, that there doesn't exist a pettybourgeois christianity.
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,035
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: September 22, 2018, 04:49:02 PM »

Those changes have nothing at all to do with the abuse scandals, or the anti-authoritarian backlash that rose with the rise of mass media...
Logged
John Henry Eden
Rookie
**
Posts: 135
Uganda


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: May 13, 2019, 07:40:14 AM »

I will say this, it's spirit certainly is
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: May 13, 2019, 02:17:01 PM »

     The role of the world is to cleave to God, and to change to suit Him. The Catholic Church mistook this for being the other way around.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderator
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: May 13, 2019, 02:57:41 PM »
« Edited: May 13, 2019, 06:05:07 PM by Hugo Award nominee »

Blaming Vatican II for the current woes of the Catholic Church is like blaming Japan's current sociocultural doldrums on the DPJ. The people implementing the Council's decisions over the course of Paul VI's pontificate misjudged the situation in which the Church found itself in the postwar world and so the changes they ushered in haven't gone as well as was expected or hoped, but the idea that the Council was actively bad for the Church is asinine and it's deeply troubling that it's become as mainstream among conservative Catholics as it has. It's ridiculous to suggest that somehow secularization, embourgeoisement, the sexual revolution, etc. would have passed Catholicism by if only the Mass had still been in Latin or if only the Church had remained officially antisemitic or whatever. Do people seriously believe this?

Taking the long view, it would make at least as much sense to ask if Trent was really good for the Church.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.052 seconds with 11 queries.